thought testing DR is a bit complicated and i don´t know if their methode is convincing.

This might not really be the ideal place to discuss this deutsches gearhead-centric review, but the dr range on the 6d is a big letdown if it's true what they discovered. Why do you think their simple approach with a greyscale chart isn't convincing?

Other than that the sharpness difference 5d2>5d3>6d might not matter much in real life, but it confirms that Canon has modified the tradeoff less noise/banding for less sharpness.

thought testing DR is a bit complicated and i don´t know if their methode is convincing.

This might not really be the ideal place to discuss this deutsches gearhead-centric review, but the dr range on the 6d is a big letdown if it's true what they discovered. Why do you think their simple approach with a greyscale chart isn't convincing?

Regarding the dynamic range: They don't even analyze the noise of the (low) tonal values - doesn't make much sense to me.

Anyway, as for the sensor - do we really need more reviews anyway? - I think DxO has provided enough data. I'd rather had raws straight out of camera that can be compared to corresponding raws of the same scenery from other models, so I could judge IQ by myself...

Canon-F1

thought testing DR is a bit complicated and i don´t know if their methode is convincing.

This might not really be the ideal place to discuss this deutsches gearhead-centric review, but the dr range on the 6d is a big letdown if it's true what they discovered. Why do you think their simple approach with a greyscale chart isn't convincing?

Other than that the sharpness difference 5d2>5d3>6d might not matter much in real life, but it confirms that Canon has modified the tradeoff less noise/banding for less sharpness.

a wedge test is not very scientific and depends on the software you use.

Traumflieger is one of the worst sources for reviews that exists. It's aimed at the very low level consumers who don't leave FULL AUTO Mode.If you want reviews goto the digital picture or dpreview or photozone.de but NEVER Traumflieger.

thought testing DR is a bit complicated and i don´t know if their methode is convincing.

This might not really be the ideal place to discuss this deutsches gearhead-centric review, but the dr range on the 6d is a big letdown if it's true what they discovered. Why do you think their simple approach with a greyscale chart isn't convincing?

Other than that the sharpness difference 5d2>5d3>6d might not matter much in real life, but it confirms that Canon has modified the tradeoff less noise/banding for less sharpness.

i wouldnt worry about sharpness too muchwhen i first got the 5Dmk3 first thing i did was extensively compare the sharpness vs the 5dmk2 using all my lenses and was upset to discover the 5d2 was sharper however after having been shooting them side by side for over a year now the 5Dmk3 raw files can be pushed around more than the mk2 files both in terms of highlight headroom and aplication of sharpening, essentially the 5Dmk3 can be sharpened more before artifacts appear. the net result is probably only noticable with pixel peeping, I would guess the 6D IQ will be similarNote I said guess

I don't do that either anymore since I recently calculated what mp count is for what print size, and 100% pixel sharpness @20mp is seldom necessary - though very nice for some headroom in postprocessing and to play with, esp. with macro shots. Another reason is that my lenses aren't the sharpest possible - so for example with the Tamron 24-70vc it's good to have a 6d, while with a super-sharp prime or the €2000 Canon 24-70ii some might find it a little frustrating that the lens outperforms the sensor.